Is Ron Paul 2012's Black Swan?

Tyler Durden's picture

Courtesy of Bill Buckler of The Privateer

The Great Non Debate

For five years, the writing on the wall has been crystal clear. As 2007 began, the US Foreclosure Market Report for 2006 showed that foreclosures for the year had reached 1.2 million, an increase of 42 percent over the 2005 figure. In early February 2007, in the midst of a growing rash of bankruptcies among small US sub-prime mortgage issuers, New Century Financial announced that it was “recalculating” its “profits for the previous three quarters. New Century was one of the three biggest mortgage brokers in the US. In two days, its stock price dropped 40 percent. Six months later, President Bush was calling the now obvious collapse in the US real estate market a “blip” on the US economy. Two months after that, the stock market peaked. A year after that, in September/October 2008, the global economy froze solid and was only thawed by the biggest explosion of money creation in history. Now, here we are at the start of 2012. Nothing has changed. No positive steps have been made. The symptoms have been disguised under an avalanche of palliatives but the disease continues to eat away at the substance of the system on which it feeds. The major effort of government and “mainstream” analysts everywhere has been to avoid, deflect and actively silence any nascent discussion of the root of the problem.

The root of the problem is perfectly illustrated in the fact that since August 1971, the funded debt of the US government has risen from $US 400 Billion to $US 15,236 Billion. The severity of the problem is illustrated by the fact that with Mr Obama having yet to complete his third full year as President, he has presided over $US 4,600 Billion (or almost one-third) of that increase. The root of the problem is the abandonment of money - the final legal connection between Gold and the US Dollar was ended in August 1971. The severity of the problem is the grotesque expansion of what has taken its place.

None of this has been or is being discussed because the establishment in the US and everywhere else does not want it discussed. A REAL “black swan event” - an event that deviates by 180 degrees from what is “normally expected” - would be a political debate over root causes and basic principles. The great merit of Ron Paul - and the great service he is giving to his own and every other nation - is the fact that he is doing everything he can to raise the debate to that level. That makes Dr Paul a unique politician, a man who tells people what most of them DON’T want to hear or understand.

Or at least they don’t think they want to understand it. Dr Paul’s great and merited attractiveness to a growing number of admirers has a very simple source. He is that rarest of creatures - a FREE man. He is beholden to nobody. He has developed his ideas and his convictions over a long and fruitful life of independent thinking. He does not compromise. He homes in on the fundamental issue and principle of any political issue and serves it up without salt or other “seasoning”. He says what he means and he means what he says. He is the living embodiment of the “dream” that most Americans have long since given up on as they saw it slip further and further beyond their grasp. He is the only prominent person who is doing everything he can to turn the non-debate which masquerades as the “mainstream” in the US and global political economy into something of substance. That, far more than the presidency, is his goal.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
King_of_simpletons's picture

"When Mitt Romney came to Town"

And this dude wants to create jobs and lift the masses out of the economic slump. What an opportunistic establishment liar...

UGrev's picture

these videos are like sunshine.. 

gbresnahan's picture

My #1 issue with Romney, that makes him completely unelectable, is you don't know where he stands on the issues.  He will do and say anything to get elected.  He cannot be trusted.  His words mean nothing.

IAmNotMark's picture

So, when it's between Romney and Obama, you'll vote for the scummy, low-life, dirtball?

Or will you vote for the low-life, scummy, dirtball?  Your choice!

dizzyfingers's picture

Fight organized crime; don't vote.

OttoMBMP's picture


Ron Paul as a candidate would be the only justification to make an exception from this rule.

FEDbuster's picture

I couldn't vote for Obummer or McLame last election, I know I won't vote for Obummer or Romney or Gingrich this time around.  It's Ron Paul or none of the above for me.

I will continue to prepare for the economic collapse which has been delayed by overt and hidden money printing.  The monetary alchemy will fail regardless of who is POTUS, at least with Ron Paul you have someone who will know what to do to fix it.

ToNYC's picture

Ok, so we should not vote for a candidate that fights organized crime? Cognitive dissonance is worth noticing if nothing else to sort the handle delivering this call to inaction.

kairological's picture

My #1 issue with Romney is that he comes from a cult religion that issues secret undergarments to its members.

eatthebanksters's picture

Right now its anyone but Obama for me...

Conrad Murray's picture

And morons like this are why Americans, once again, will elect another piece of shit. Just as the "anybody but Bush" idiots secured the election for Oblahblah, so will they secure the retards on parade vote for Magical Underpants Mitt.

Congratulations America, you are ruled by shitheads.

cranky-old-geezer's picture



Congratulations America, you are ruled by shitheads.

... elected by shitheads.

AgShaman's picture

He prefers to be called "Mittens"

It's the manliest nickname they could reference from the lost golden tablets

swani's picture

Voting 'against' the other party is part of the problem.

ToNYC's picture

When the left hand votes against the right hand, nobody wipes, Muslim or Christian or Jew.

Clockwork Orange's picture

Top 5 Contributors - Iowa.  Any Questions?

Mitt Romney

Goldman Sachs $367,200 Credit Suisse Group $203,750 Morgan Stanley $199,800 HIG Capital $186,500 Barclays $157,750
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

You are kidding, right? The name's hyperlinked. And somebody gave you a greenie? 

Temporalist's picture

You can up vote yourself as most douchebags with 1 up vote have.

krispkritter's picture

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

11b40's picture

I'm guessing you have plenty of experience in that regard, junior, but thanks for the informative post.

11b40's picture

Oops!  My bad, Clockwork.  Didn't see blue link on my i-phone.

Muddy1's picture


It's worse than what you've said.  For the 2012 election cycle 8 of Romney's top 10 donors are banks and/or financial institutions, 13 of the 20 listed at the link.  I think I'm going to puke.  But I will look at the other candidates as well.  Thank you for the link.

ToNYC's picture

Mitt will keep the ATMs printing whatever paper his buds can short.

UGrev's picture

Awesome.. so when Obama wins term 2, I can call you up and say "Nice job, fuck face..." ?  Stop voting for the sake of voting and make it mean something other than some vendetta. 

sessinpo's picture

Repubs like to say that when Romney was gov of Mass, he had to get elected in a liberal state and work with a liberal legislative branch. The majority (democrats) wanted the various liberal policies such as mandatory health care. Romney gave it to them.

Thus, can we count on Romney to do the same as President?

I think what most republicans and many of those that call themselves "conservative" (the latest buzz word to be adopted and eventually warped) is that a large segment of the population see all the candidates from both parties as people with no real principles and not trustworthy. Do I want a dumbass that is absolutely honest and truthful and able to admit their mistakes (for the betterment of all) and actually fix it or do I want a genius that is decietful and just a political animal that bends with the wind (and bends the rule of law) for the benefit of only himself, his party or a few friends?

Elmer Fudd's picture

Cant ou say that for all of them except RP?  Remember Perry's "FED is Treason" bull shizzle? 

Didnt Obama prove to everyone that you really can say anything to get elected and then you just do whatever the puppetmasters told you to?

snowbaall's picture

I'm no Philidelphia lawyer.

But I like Dr. Paul because he's right.

Your mother's smelly asshole.

I remember back in 99 when he predicted that U.S. foreign policy would lead to terrorism on American soil.

I remember in 03 when he predicted the housing bubble.

What's not to like?

MarketWatchTerrorist's picture

self edited as potentially distracting the debate from more important issues

benjamin_1114's picture

Romney is just another empty-suit politician

akak's picture

An empty suit with a fucking fat wallet.  And perfect hair.

"Oh, but he just looks so presidential!" says granny GOP lemming.

Zero Debt's picture

What we know for sure is that his name is Romney.

DaveyJones's picture

that's why he's "perfect" for the job 

chunga's picture

Mittens is definately a waffler. This post speaks directly to the foreclosure crisis and I think Mitt has waffled that he would like to see everyone get kicked out pronto.

Has Ron Paul or Judge Napolitano weighed in on foreclosures?

I pulled this Fed. Court Order from PACER on Jan. 5, 2012. I think it could be a pretty big deal. Paging Macho.

U.S. District Court John J. McConnell ordered a stay on foreclosure cases and has appointed a "Special Master" to mediate the cases.

The Playing Field Has Been Leveled

"Special Master" does sound rather sinister; and being a banker undoubtedly carries a certain stigma. But I say let's give her a chance.

If you read the Judge's Order a couple of things stand out.

"Order the appearance of any persons necessary to settle any claims…".

"Order the appearance of any persons necessary to settle any claims completely and or order the appearance of any non-parties, including but not limited to municipal and other government officials and lien holders, that may be essential for a total resolution of the claims;". if this were simply a matter of failing to dot "i's" and cross "t's" will these alleged lenders be allowed to file Motions for Protective Order like they ALWAYS do?

Doing so makes it look like they trying to hide something.

I think what they are hiding is the fact that third parties via CDS have made them whole (mainly bailout bed-mate AIG); something they CAN legally do not more than once twice, not less than once never, but once. That, my friends, IS what they are hiding and how they have been unjustly enriched.

It has happened to you - whether in default or not. Your grand-children will be paying it back...and no; they won't be bailed out or receive a bonus.

The rubber will meet the road when the time comes to insure the title.

The Unholy Pig Men Alliance has some serious issues to address lest they suffer the lash of a Trial by Jury.

If a settlement takes place mustn't the mortgage must be released at closing by the current mortgage owner (who’s that?) before a new mortgage with title insurance is issued??

Specifically, if the title company is not satisfied that there is a good release on the old mortgage, won't it refuse to insure a new mortgage?

Same applies if paid in cash – still need title insurance with homeowner as named insured. No?

No title insurance means no standing means no foreclosure.

(Obligatory spam warning: Link goes to Foreclosure Hamlet. Advertising is not permitted. If you hate blogs do not click.)

antisepticWipe's picture

Ron Paul is in the "follow the law" camp. If the banks don't *LEGALLY* have titles to the properties then fuck them. Sue them all.

chunga's picture

This could cause an avalanche. They do not want a trial by jury. Ever.

Pants McPants's picture

Ugh, can't go with you on Huntsman.  He seems like a nice enough guy, but his war/economic views are much closer to the "mainstream" candidates than they are to Ron Paul's views. 

The Monkey's picture

Huntsman is just a carbon copy of Mitt Romney.

Anybody notice that absolutely NO ONE except for Paul is advocating protecting the taxpayer from bailouts? All of the rest of these guys are a bunch of slimebags.

How might you know you may be at a super-giant Robert Precterish top?  One hint: the complete lack of liquidationists, save Ron Paul.  Liquidationists slowly disappeared after FDR took the helm in 1932.  Prior to FDR, and especially prior to Strong's Federal Reserve, liquidationists were mainstream in the US, deflation was viewed as part of the economic cycle (in some cases, desirable).

It's like looking at investor sentiment and seeing 100% bulls and no bears.

Flakmeister's picture

No, Huntsman at least tries to convey rationalism...

Edit: Based on 1 to 4 up-down votes, it looks like 80% of Zerohedge are creationists...

akak's picture

I am firmly in the Creationist camp.

After a heavy dinner of chimichangas, rice and beans last night, I just created a large pile of Santorum after sitting on the can --- and now my Romnoids are hurting again.  I just newt it was going to happen.

qmhedging's picture

There’re many people rumored about imminent instability of North Korea government these days in micro-blog space in China. Referring the lack of news come out of DPRK on Kim Jong-un’s birthday?Jan 8?. Thought that’s part of “Project China Bear”.

ToNYC's picture

If North Korea didn't exist, China would need to invent it. Quite unfortunately, China is the worst colonist power so nothing good happens as in their implants into a culture of spiritual domination. Intellectual property denyers live to copy forever and lose their best brains to those that treat them better.

non_anon's picture

RP is not a company man, I'll shit my drawers if he can